jan 22

No Lulz For Denby

Continuing my admitted over-interest in the reactions to Denby's Snark, here's a Flavorwire interview with him, where he takes up the Sternbergh review: "He says snark is an appropriate response to a corrupt and dishonorable world in which lies have been passed out to us in the past eight years in particular. I wouldn't quarrel with his description of the world. But the idea that snark is the appropriate response to that is just inane. The appropriate response to it is criticism, analysis and best of all, satire." Update: everyone in the fray here.


Update: Gawker acknowledges it.

posted by Rex at 1:02 PM on January 22, 2009

What's the precise linchpin of distinction between snark and satire? Whether the eyes are rolling or glinting?

posted by katiebakes at 3:21 PM on January 22, 2009

NOTE: The commenting window has expired for this post.